A ranking of states in categories including total number of hunters and anglers, spending by sportsmen, jobs supported, taxes generated, number of days spent hunting and fishing and the states most traveled to by hunters and anglers has been released for the first time.

Nationally, Texas is at the top of the pack. It's No. 1 in total hunters and anglers, money spent, jobs supported and tax revenue generated. Florida is No. 2 on those lists.

The new state-by-state rankings were compiled to complement a national report, "Hunting and Fishing: Bright Stars of the American Economy – A force as big as all outdoors," which spotlights the immense impact hunters and anglers have on the economy at the national, state and local levels. The report was produced by the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation (CSF).



Lone Star Leaders

Which states have the most hunters and anglers? Texas is No. 1 (2.6 million), Florida is No. 2 (2 million), California is No. 3 (1.7 million), Ohio is No. 4 (1.48 million) and Pennsylvania is No. 5 (1.41 million).

Which states are the big spenders? Texas is tops again ($6.6 billion), Florida is No. 2 ($4.8 billion), California is No. 3 ($3.6 billion), Pennsylvania is No. 4 ($3.5 billion) and Minnesota is No. 5 ($3.4 billion).

What does this spending support? Jobs, of course. Texas is No. 1 (106,000 jobs), Florida No. 2 (85,000), Wisconsin No. 3 (57,000), Minnesota No. 4 (55,000) and California No. 5 (53,000).

However, when it comes to who spends the most time in the field and woods, Pennsylvania hunters beat out Texans, spending 16 million days afield compared to the 13.4 million that Texans spend. Florida is out front for the number of days spent on the water (41.5 million), compared to the No. 2 state, Texas, with 38.9 million days.

Florida is also the No. 1 destination state for fishing, with North Carolina at No. 2. When it comes to the most traveled-to state for hunting, Georgia is No. 1, followed by Colorado in the second spot.

Roll Out the Welcome Mats

It's a simple fact – hunting and fishing have a major impact on every state in the country. When the amount of money spent on these activities is analyzed and the jobs and taxes created are factored in, the impact becomes much more tangible.

"The economic impact that sportsmen have on state economies should be a wake-up call to state governments to welcome and encourage hunting and fishing in their state," said Jeff Crane, president of the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation. "The evidence is clear: states that encourage hunting and fishing by providing access and maintaining healthy habitats and fisheries benefit many times over through jobs and taxes, as well as enjoying a boost to travel and tourism."

When you compare spending by hunters and anglers to other sectors, their impact on the state's economy is clear. Here are a few highlights:

> Sportsmen support more than twice the jobs in Texas than Dell Computer Corp., Lockheed Martin, Electronic Data Systems and Dow Chemical Co. combined (106,000 jobs vs. 49,000).

> Sportsmen support more jobs in Florida than Disney World (85,000 jobs vs. 61,000).

> Pennsylvania sportsmen outnumber the combined populations of Allentown, Erie, Pittsburgh, Reading and Scranton two to one (1.4 million vs. 680,297).

> Michigan sportsmen annually spend more than the combined cash receipts for dairy, greenhouse/nursery, corn, soybeans and cattle – the state's Top 5 agricultural commodities ($3.4 billion vs. $2.9 billion).

> Annual spending by Florida anglers is three times greater than the cash receipts from the state's orange crop ($4.4 billion vs. 1.2 billion).

> Annual spending by Wisconsin sportsmen is equal to the revenues of the state's dairy industry ($3.1 billion).

> Annual spending by California sportsmen is greater than the cash receipts of the state's grape crop ($3.6 billion vs. $3 billion).

"Spending by sportsmen benefits not only the manufacturers of hunting- and fishing-related products, but everything from local mom and pop businesses to wildlife conservation," said Doug Painter, president of National Shooting Sports Foundation. "And because most hunting and fishing takes place in rural areas, much of the spending benefits less affluent parts of the state."

Some Big Numbers

On the national level, 34 million sportsmen age 16 and older spent more than $76 billion in 2006, supporting 1.6 million jobs. If a single corporation grossed as much as hunters and anglers spend, it would be among America's 20 largest – ahead of Target, Costco and AT&T.

These statistics are impressive and, if anything, they underestimate the impact of sportsmen since they do not take into account the millions of hunters and anglers under age 16 or who were not able to get out and hunt or fish in 2006. When sportsmen's spending is thought of in business terms and compared to other sectors of the economy, it is quite remarkable.

From small rural towns scattered across the country's landscape to the bottom line of Fortune 500 companies located in major cities, if you take away hunting and fishing, you take away the equivalent of a multi-billion dollar corporation.

Notable

> The report was produced by the CSF with support from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, National Marine Manufacturers Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation and SCI - First For Hunters. It uses the results from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation and statistics provided by the American Sportfishing Association and Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

> To see the state-by-state rankings, click here.